Why are the press so anti-PS3?

[McDonaldsGuy]

CGI-Quality said:

McDonaldsGuy said:
1. Sony tried to sell a $599 console.
2. Sony lost many of its exclusives, some as high profile as GTA, Assassin's Creed, Final Fantasy, DMC and Tekken. And yet they expect us to pay $599 (now $299 finally) for their console.
3. Their first/second party isn't up to standards. Nintendo could afford to lose third party support cause they had Mario, Zelda, RARE, Star Fox, etc. etc. to fall back on. Sony's first/second party is just average.
4. Their lies and propaganda and false hype.
5. Them always trying to force their new worthless technology on us. The CELL and Blu-ray put the pS3 to astronomical prices and delayed the system relentlessly. Not to mention making it complicated to work on.

You would have been better of without some of this nonsense you posted. Have you got proof that Blu-ray was worthless? Your assessment of their 1st/2nd party studis/games is your opinion. The rest of the industry, thankfully, doesn't seem to agree with it.

The PS3's first/second party games are average at the most - at least not worth it to pay $300 for the console. Sony is the complete opposite of MS and Nintendo (who both have franchises that could keep them alive with ease - Sony has nothing).

And Blu-ray is worthless, optical discs are on their way out and it pushed the PS3 to cost $599 in the beginning, and what benefits? Yeah, so we don't have to switch discs.... I'd rather switch discs than go through 40 minute installs. Seriously. Metal Gear Solid 4 would've been better on 2 or 3 discs (original MGS was on 2 discs anyways), rather than watching Snake smoke and messages for 20 minutes.